While Ayn Rand never would have considered herself a “libertarian”, there is a lot of overlap between the actual beliefs of objectivists and libertarians — sometimes we don’t get there from the same premises, but we reach the same conclusions.

]]>By: Akstonhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2011/05/23/quote-of-the-day-179/#comment-77375
Fri, 27 May 2011 15:40:41 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=9315#comment-77375The advantage of fiction as a vehicle to present a philosophy is that any “uber human” fictional characters demonstrate by example. Following an ideal fictional practitioner thought conflicts can let the reader determine if the philosophy fits for them.

In the midst of all their flawless passionate drive, Rand’s characters exemplified the non-initiation of force which most libertarians value.

]]>By: Johnhttp://www.thelibertypapers.org/2011/05/23/quote-of-the-day-179/#comment-77372
Fri, 27 May 2011 05:36:49 +0000http://www.thelibertypapers.org/?p=9315#comment-77372But she wrote much more that does not fit into normal people’s minds.

Under a proper social system, a private individual is legally free to take any action he pleases (so long as he does not violate the rights of others), while a government official is bound by law in his every official act. A private individual may do anything except that which is legally forbidden; a government official may do nothing except that which is legally permitted.

This is the means of subordinating “might” to “right.” This is the American concept of “a government of laws and not of men.”

The nature of the laws proper to a free society and the source of its government’s authority are both to be derived from the nature and purpose of a proper government. The basic principle of both is indicated in the Declaration of Independence: “to secure these [individual] rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed . . .”

Since the protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of a government, it is the only proper subject of legislation: all laws must be based on individual rights and aimed at their protection. All laws must be objective (and objectively justifiable): men must know clearly, and in advance of taking an action, what the law forbids them to do (and why), what constitutes a crime and what penalty they will incur if they commit it.

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.

We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

Frédéric Bastiat, “The Law”

We disapprove of state coerced charity. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any charity.